We’ve deliberately kept it simple so far, but might add P-loops and figure-8s down the track (ha). Branches would be great too, but the UI complexity we’d have to add for splitting / merging the lines and controlling where the trains go would make it a dubious proposition.

Both of those additions would be great, I keep on getting the error that a track cannot repeat a station at the moment.

Simplest way of doing branching is adding a Y fork, and a switch which flips every time a train passes so you get half and half going each way and merging would be simple trains from either branch would return to the main truck. That solves the routing issue

So having branches is not an issue the main probably is how add a gesture to make the branches and make it distinct from extending a line normally. Certainly could work though, and I really would like to build something like the Northern Line

You could simply tag forks with a letter, and have the train abide the letter filter on the line, would that be complicated to code? so, train tagged B would approach a split, see A fork, see B fork, and then choose B and follow it.

You could simply tag forks with a letter, and have the train abide the letter filter on the line, would that be complicated to code? so, train tagged B would approach a split, see A fork, see B fork, and then choose B and follow it.

I like this idea a lot. Perhaps some sort of slight color variation would also serve as an indicator of separate branches.

In regards to creating branches, holding down an option/alt key while dragging from an existing line might be a good idea. That way, there’s no interface clutter to worry about.

I have never really liked to ask for features in a game, as it would mean more things to do for the devs, but I feel like this game should support at least what has been called P-loops and allow to join the same station twice in a line. Why that?

First of all imagine that you’re running a circular line, and a new station appears on an island, next to that line. What to do then? You only have the option to spend two tunnels for joining it to your regular network, or to make it a linear line with the consequent loss of effectivity, which would probably collapse the network because it would most likely need a revamp of the whole map. A P-loop there would be an elegant solution that allows you to maintain your network shape with a bit of planification, if passengers are able to commute with trains of the same line, especially if the crossing station is a non-standard one in the zone, which you currently aren’t allowed to repeat.

Another one that happens a lot for example in Auckland is when you find yourself with an station that requires a tunnel because of the bays and water inlets. You can maybe join that station to another one without needing tunnels, then you have to create a tunnel just for a small piece of water that wouldn’t be crossed if joined from that other station, saving you a tunnel which you need to use due to the route creation mechanism of the game. In fact, if you wait some time, a new station may appear that allows you to save that tunnel!

This would also allow to join a strange station two (or more) times to a line, at the cost of increasing the length of the lines. It would reduce the frustration of having 10+ circle stations without a single triangle or square, but would need you to be careful enough not to make lines too long to serve the rest of the circles on time.

Probably there will be some ideas I haven’t thought of for and against the idea, and don’t know about the complication of implementing that, but I’d say it could be a good enhancement for the game.

We’d love to add P-loops! The reason we haven’t yet (and won’t likely before release, but hopefully will afterwards) is the way the individual links have been coded. I won’t delve into the finer details of it, but they’re more rigid than they should be. They have a specific start and end point, and can only connect starts to ends. P-loops need to connect a start—start or end—end; this introduces an absolute ton of edge cases, for everything from pathfinding to track editing to positioning carriages, and trying to implement it right now would result in So. Many. Bugs.

In hindsight we should have prioritised this earlier in development, building tracks is what the game is all about after all.

I frankly don’t think many people mind if bugs crop up due to the this. It’s a great game anyway and I for one would rather a great, slightly buggy, new feature than no new feature at all. If you wanted a specific anchor point for the loops then you could make them a drag and drop upgrade with a small icon at the branch to show w where it is and to enable better dragability. Maybe the track could be darkened to show it ( lightened in night node). If the user wants to move the branch they can grab and drag. To remove the branch simply drag in to empty space. They could be offered at 1 a piece at a similar rate to tunnels

Oh believe me, they notice (and care, I get all of the support emails for them). And it’s also a bit of poor form as we’d be shipping something that isn’t fairly well polished. Having a well made game is really important to us. We just don’t have the time to make it a really good feature at this point in time.

I totally understand that, I think I worded my past post a bit badly. What I meant was that I don’t mind if there are a few bugs because I know how hard you work on everything. If people don’t understand well that’s their problem but I totally understand that you want to have as many bugs smoothed out as possible before releasing the new feature.

Also wouldn’t 1 way loops mitigate most of the pathfinder bugs as the passenger s would only have 1 way to go regardless of where they want to go. Unless the station has multiple lines through it which could affect their thinking… Hmm…